THE PITFALLS OF
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: EUPHEMISMS EXCORIATED

by Kenneth Jernigan

As civilizations decline, they become increasingly concerned with form
over substance, particularly with respect to language. At the time of the First World War
we called it shell shock-a simple term, two one-syllable words, clear and
descriptive. A generation later, after the Second World War had come and gone, we called
it combat fatigue. It meant the same thing, and there were still just two words-but
the two syllables had grown to four. Today the two words have doubled, and the original
pair of syllables have mushroomed to eight. It even has an acronym, PTSD-post traumatic
stress disorder. It still means the same thing, and it still hurts as much or as
little, but it is more in tune with current effete sensibilities.

It is also a perfect example of the pretentious euphemisms that
characterize almost everything we do and say. Euphemisms and the politically correct
language which they exemplify are sometimes only prissy, sometimes ridiculous, and
sometimes tiresome. Often, however, they are more than that. At their worst they obscure
clear thinking and damage the very people and causes they claim to benefit.

The blind have had trouble with euphemisms for as long as anybody can
remember, and late twentieth-century America is no exception. The form has changed (in
fact, everything is very "politically correct"), but the old notions of
inferiority and second-class status still remain. The euphemisms and the political
correctness dont help. If anything, they make matters worse since they claim modern
thought and new enlightenment. Here is a recent example from the federal government:

United States Department of Education

Washington, D.C.

May 4, 1993

Memorandum

TO: Office for Civil Rights Senior Staff

FROM: Jeanette J. Lim, Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

SUBJECT: Language Reference to Persons with a Disability

As you know, the October 29, 1992, Rehabilitation Act Amendments of
1992 replaced the term "handicap" with the term "disability." This
term should be used in all communications.

OCR recognizes the preference of individuals with disabilities to use
phraseology that stresses the individuality of all children, youth, and adults, and then
the incidence of a disability. In all our written and oral communications, care should be
given to avoid expressions that many persons find offensive. Examples of phraseology to
avoid and alternative suggestions are noted below.

"Persons with a disability" or "individuals with
disabilities" instead of "disabled person."

"Persons who are deaf" or "young people with hearing
impairments" instead of "deaf people."

"People who are blind" or "persons with a visual
impairment" instead of "blind people."

"A student with dyslexia" instead of "a dyslexic
student."

In addition, please avoid using phrases such as "the deaf,"
"the mentally retarded," or "the blind." The only exception to this
policy involves instances where the outdated phraseology is contained in a quote or a
title, or in legislation or regulations; it is then necessary to use the citation
verbatim.

I hope this information has been helpful to you. If you have any
questions about any of these favored and disfavored expressions, feel free to contact Jean
Peelen, Director, Elementary and Secondary Education Policy Division, at (202) 205-8637.

That is what the memorandum says, and if it were an isolated instance,
we could shrug it off and forget it. But it isnt. It is more and more the standard
thinking, and anybody who objects is subject to sanction.

Well, we of the National Federation of the Blind do object, and we are
doing something about it. At our recent national convention in Dallas we passed a
resolution on the subject, and we plan to distribute it throughout the country and press
for action on it. Here it is:

RESOLUTION 93-01

WHEREAS, the word blind accurately and clearly describes the
condition of being unable to see, as well as the condition of having such limited eyesight
that alternative techniques are required to do efficiently the ordinary tasks of daily
living that are performed visually by those having good eyesight; and

WHEREAS, there is increasing pressure in certain circles to use a
variety of euphemisms in referring to blindness or blind persons-euphemisms such as hard
of seeing, visually challenged, sightless, visually impaired, people
with blindness, people who are blind, and the like; and

WHEREAS, a differentiation must be made among these euphemisms: some
(such as hard of seeing, visually challenged, and people with blindness)
being totally unacceptable and deserving only ridicule because of their strained and
ludicrous attempt to avoid such straightforward, respectable words as blindness, blind,
the blind, blind person, or blind persons; others (such as visually
impaired, and visually limited) being undesirable when used to avoid the word blind,
and acceptable only to the extent that they are reasonably employed to distinguish between
those having a certain amount of eyesight and those having none; still others (such as sightless)
being awkward and serving no useful purpose; and still others (such as people who are
blind or persons who are blind) being harmless and not objectionable when used
in occasional and ordinary speech but being totally unacceptable and pernicious when used
as a form of political correctness to imply that the word person must invariably
precede the word blind to emphasize the fact that a blind person is first and
foremost a person; and

WHEREAS, this euphemism concerning people or persons who
are blind-when used in its recent trendy, politically correct form-does the exact opposite
of what it purports to do since it is overly defensive, implies shame instead of true
equality, and portrays the blind as touchy and belligerent; and

WHEREAS, just as an intelligent person is willing to be so designated
and does not insist upon being called a person who is intelligent and a group of bankers
are happy to be called bankers and have no concern that they be referred to as
persons who are in the banking business, so it is with the blind-the only difference being
that some people (blind and sighted alike) continue to cling to the outmoded notion that
blindness (along with everything associated with it) connotes inferiority and lack of
status; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in convention
assembled in the city of Dallas, Texas, this 9th day of July, 1993, that the
following statement of policy be adopted:

We believe that it is respectable to be blind, and although we have
no particular pride in the fact of our blindness, neither do we have any shame in it. To
the extent that euphemisms are used to convey any other concept or image, we deplore such
use. We can make our own way in the world on equal terms with others, and we intend to do
it.

In 1994, Dr. Jernigan spoke to a gathering of leaders in the field of work with the
blind. His message was that programs for the blind and blind consumers must recognize the
power and value that each of them possesses. When we work together, there is the
possibility for much greater progress than would be reachable if we insist on attacking
problems alone. This is how Dr. Jernigan put it: